The reconstruction or repair of oral and maxillofacial functionalities and aesthetics is a priority for patients affected by tooth loss, congenital defects, trauma deformities, or various dental diseases. Therefore, in dental medicine, tissue reconstruction represents a major interest in oral and maxillofacial surgery, periodontics, orthodontics, endodontics, and even daily clinical practice. The current clinical approaches involve a vast array of techniques ranging from the traditional use of tissue grafts to the most innovative regenerative procedures, such as tissue engineering. In recent decades, a wide range of both artificial and natural biomaterials and scaffolds, genes, stem cells isolated from the mouth area (dental follicle, deciduous teeth, periodontal ligament, dental pulp, salivary glands, and adipose tissue), and various growth factors have been tested in tissue engineering approaches in dentistry, with many being proven successful. However, to fully eliminate the problems of traditional bone and tissue reconstruction in dentistry, continuous research is needed. Based on a recent literature review, this paper creates a picture of current innovative strategies applying dental stem cells for tissue regeneration in different dental fields and maxillofacial surgery, and offers detailed information regarding the available scientific data and practical applications.

In 2019, a new type of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, the causing agent of COVID-19, was first detected in Wuhan, China. On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization declared a pandemic. The manifestations of COVID-19 are mostly age-dependent and potentially more severe in cases with involved co-morbidities. The gravity of the symptoms depends on the clinical stage of the infection. The most common symptoms include runny nose and nasal congestion, anosmia, dysgeusia or hypogeusia, diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, respiratory distress, fatigue, ocular symptoms, diarrhea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. These systemic conditions are often accompanied by skin and mucosal lesions. Oral lesions reported in patients with COVID-19 include: herpex simplex, candidiasis, geographic tongue, aphthous-like ulcers, hemorrhagic ulcerations, necrotic ulcerations, white hairy tongue, reddish macules, erythematous surfaces, petechiae, and pustular enanthema. It is still unclear if these manifestations are a direct result of the viral infection, a consequence of systemic deterioration, or adverse reactions to treatments. Poor oral hygiene in hospitalized or quarantined COVID-19 patients should also be considered as an aggravating condition. This narrative review is focused on presenting the most relevant data from the literature regarding oral manifestations related to SARS-CoV-2, as well as the challenges faced by the dental system during this pandemic. A routine intraoral examination is recommended in COVID-19 patients, either suspected or confirmed, as, in certain cases, oral manifestations represent a sign of severe infection or even of a life-threatening condition. It is our belief that extensive knowledge of all possible manifestations, including oral lesions, in cases of COVID-19 is of great importance in the present uncertain context, including new, currently emerging viral variants with unknown future impact.

Examining specific patterns of major cranio-facial alterations through cephalometric measurements in order to improve the Prader–Willi (PWS) syndrome diagnostic poses a major challenge of identifying interlinkages between numerous credentials. These interactions can be captured through probabilistic models of conditional independence between heterogeneous variables. Our research included 18 subjects (aged 4 to 28 years) genetically diagnosed with Prader–Willi syndrome and a healthy control group (matched age and sex). A morphometric and cephalometric analysis was performed upon all the subjects in order to obtain the needed specific data. We have, therefore, firstly deployed several integrated Gaussian graphical models (GGMs) to capture the positive and negative partial correlations and the intensity of the connections between numerous credentials configured to determine specific cranio-facial characteristics of patients with PWS compared to others without this genetic disorder (case-control analysis). Afterwards, we applied structural equation modelling (SEM) with latent class analysis to assess the impact of these coordinates on the prevalence of the Prader–Willi diagnostic. We found that there are latent interactions of features affected by external variables, and the interlinkages are strapping particularly between cranial base (with an important role in craniofacial disharmonies) and facial heights, as important characteristic patterns in determining the Prader–Willi diagnostic, while the overall patterns are significantly different in PWS and the control group. These results impact the field by providing an enhanced comprehensive perspective on cephalometric characteristics and specific patterns associated with Prader–Willi syndrome that can be used as benchmarks in determining the diagnostic of this rare genetic disorder. Furthermore, the two innovative exploratory research tools applied in this paper are very useful to the craniofacial field to infer the connections/dependencies between variables (particularly biological variables and genes) on cephalometric characteristics and specific patterns associated with Prader–Willi syndrome.

The selection of materials for full-arch restorations remains a critical decision for clinicians, with ongoing debates surrounding the utilization of hybrid versus monolithic materials. This book chapter provides a comprehensive exploration of the considerations, challenges, and implications associated with these material choices. Beginning with an overview of historical and contemporary material landscapes, the chapter delves into the dynamic interplay between hybrid and monolithic materials, examining their respective compositions, clinical suitability, and long-term performance. Discussions encompass a range of factors including prosthetic space requirements, esthetic considerations, clinical challenges such as bruxism and temporomandibular joint issues, as well as patient-specific considerations such as age. Through comparative analyses, the chapter highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each material type, offering insights into their suitability for different clinical scenarios. The chapter concludes with a discussion on future trends and innovations, paving the way for continued advancements in full-arch restoration materials. Overall, this chapter aims to inform clinicians and researchers, facilitating informed decision making and enhancing patient outcomes in implant dentistry.

Background and Objectives: Cement-retained implant restorations are widely used because they offer favorable esthetics and a passive fit. Their long-term performance is strongly influenced by cement selection and surface conditioning. This study compared the clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Plus^®) with a provisional acrylic-urethane cement (DentoTemp™) in partial implant restorations. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort of 40 patients with three-unit implant-supported fixed dental prostheses was followed for at least three years. Restorations were fabricated from zirconia or metal-ceramic frameworks and cemented with either Fuji Plus^® or DentoTemp™. Clinical outcomes included retention, failure events, marginal adaptation, and peri-implant tissue response. In order to illustrate the impact of cement type and abutment height, mechanical testing was also carried out on standardized in vitro models; however, these tests were not powered for formal hypothesis testing. Although OCT images were included in this study only as illustrative examples from our clinical database and were not obtained from the analyzed cohort, OCT may be a useful tool for non-invasive assessment of marginal fit. Results: Zirconia restorations showed a retention rate of 95 percent, while metal-ceramic restorations reached 85 percent. All four failures occurred in cases cemented with DentoTemp™, giving an overall retention rate of 80 percent for this group. Fuji Plus^® achieved complete retention in all cases. Re-cementation with Fuji Plus^® successfully resolved the failures. Marginal adaptation was evaluated qualitatively because radiographic analysis did not enable accurate measurement of marginal gaps. When cement remnants were found, mild peri-implant inflammation was seen. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this small retrospective, non-randomized cohort, Fuji Plus^® demonstrated a tendency toward better peri-implant tissue response and longer-term retention than DentoTemp™. These findings should be interpreted as preliminary and exploratory rather than conclusive. Fuji Plus^® may be a suitable option for definitive cementation in partial implant restorations, while DentoTemp™ may be considered in selected situations where retrievability is important.

Background: This retrospective comparative clinical study aimed to evaluate the performance of digital versus conventional impression techniques in the fabrication of implant-supported prosthetic restorations. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 cases were included: 20 impressions obtained with conventional elastomeric materials (polyvinyl siloxane and polyether), and 20 impressions acquired digitally using two intraoral scanners (TRIOS 3 and Medit i700). All patients received partial fixed implant restorations and were documented across all stages of prosthetic treatment. Accuracy and passive fit were assessed using radiographic measurements and the Sheffield test. Linear distances (mm) at the implant–abutment interface, chairside time (min), and VAS scores (1–10) were analyzed. Clinical efficiency was evaluated based on procedural steps, chairside time, and adjustment frequency. Patient satisfaction was assessed through a structured 10-item Visual Analog Scale (VAS) questionnaire. Results: Results showed a lower misfit rate in the digital group (15%) compared to the conventional group (25%), with no final-stage misfits in digital cases. Digital workflows demonstrated shorter impression times, fewer procedural steps, and reduced the need for prosthetic adjustments. Patient satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the digital group across all VAS parameters (p < 0.001), particularly in comfort and esthetic satisfaction. Conclusions: These findings support the use of digital impressions as a clinically efficient and patient-preferred alternative to conventional methods for partial implant restorations. However, conventional impressions remain a viable option in settings where digital technology is not available. Further studies with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up are recommended to assess outcomes in full-arch rehabilitation.